If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Ruse's shameless animus toward LGBT people would seem to discredit him as a commentator on LGBT issues. But even in the face of brutal assaults on LGBT rights in Russia and the continued problem of hate crimes in the U.S., Breitbart.com is all too willing to provide a soapbox to an unapologetic bigot.

Not going.to address any of the factual evidence of the story I see...typical.

Ruse's shameless animus toward LGBT people would seem to discredit him as a commentator on LGBT issues. But even in the face of brutal assaults on LGBT rights in Russia and the continued problem of hate crimes in the U.S., Breitbart.com is all too willing to provide a soapbox to an unapologetic bigot.

Still using Media Matters eh? Is that your only response? This is why you fail princess.

Solve a man's problem with violence and help him for a day. Teach a man how to solve his problems with violence, help him for a lifetime - Belkar Bitterleaf

Ruse's shameless animus toward LGBT people would seem to discredit him as a commentator on LGBT issues. But even in the face of brutal assaults on LGBT rights in Russia and the continued problem of hate crimes in the U.S., Breitbart.com is all too willing to provide a soapbox to an unapologetic bigot.

To GLBT activists, any religious person who questions whether homosexual parenting is good for children is a "bigot". Hyperbolic language is not a substitute for facts or evidence.

And, once again, the strategy is ad homimem attack, not a look at the evidence itself.

You guys seem to keep forgetting that there was a trial in a court of law. Those are the facts.

The OJ trial was in a court of law too. As are many trials where innocent defendants are put on death row for crimes they didn't commit. Just saying a trial happened doesn't mean the right thing was done or the proper evidence was presented.

Jimenez gives a great deal convincing evidence, collected over a decade of research, that the murder of Matthew Shepard was a GLBT community-internal matter involving the drug trade.

But if the "facts" used in the trial are proven to be false later on, are they actually facts at all?

Most of the real facts seem to have been suppressed. The murderer and his drug bosses had great reason to suppress the meth connection; the GLBT community had great reason to suppress the fact that both murderer and victim were lovers, addicts, and well-known in Laramie's gay bar scene.

Most of the real facts seem to have been suppressed. The murderer and his drug bosses had great reason to suppress the meth connection; the GLBT community had great reason to suppress the fact that both murderer and victim were lovers, addicts, and well-known in Laramie's gay bar scene.

Of course they were suppressed. After all they couldn't have the truth get in the way of the agenda they, and apparently Nova as well, were pushing could they.

Solve a man's problem with violence and help him for a day. Teach a man how to solve his problems with violence, help him for a lifetime - Belkar Bitterleaf